<div dir="ltr">
<h1 style="box-sizing:border-box;font-size:16pt;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">How do newcomers become radio amateurs?</h1><p style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:16px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">WIA Board Director<span> </span><strong style="box-sizing:border-box">Brian VK2GCE</strong><span> </span>recalls how a visit by<span> </span><strong style="box-sizing:border-box">Geoffrey Booth G8DZJ</strong><span> </span>in 2002 helped put Australia on the road to the Foundation license<span> </span><br style="box-sizing:border-box"><br style="box-sizing:border-box">At the 2002 WIA Convention, a visitor from the RSGB, Geoffrey Booth G8DZJ as I recall, described the RSGB's new education system. At that time, the Australian system had 5 levels. Morse was on its way out world-wide; without Morse, the Australian system would devolve to three levels. The RSGB system had three levels, and its lowest level was below Australia's entry level - a ready-made, new, entry course, Woo Hoo!<br style="box-sizing:border-box"><br style="box-sizing:border-box">Education in the UK is based on the Education Act of 1870, which was really a way of saving children from death by factory. It is a competitive system, based on Teaching Objectives. Your achievement was measured by closed-book responses in a fixed time - so, it measured recall and literacy, rather than technical knowledge. You got graded outcome levels, like FAIL, PASS, CREDIT …<br style="box-sizing:border-box"><br style="box-sizing:border-box">In 1990, TAFE was pioneering Competency-based Training (CBT); it was another form of competitive education, this time with only two outcomes - Competent or Not Yet Competent. Assessment did not require a fixed time. Competence was demonstrated by your getting a certain percentage of the Learning Outcomes correct.<br style="box-sizing:border-box"><br style="box-sizing:border-box">Note: Teaching Objectives are what the teacher wants to achieve; Learning Outcomes are what students want to achieve. They're seldom the same.<br style="box-sizing:border-box"><br style="box-sizing:border-box">Ron Smith, VK4AGS (now SK) was also at that 2002 Convention. He was the WIA Federal Education Co-ordinator and ran the Education column in AR mag for several years till his untimely death. As a senior lecturer in engineering at UCQ, Ron had hands-on experience with Problem-Based Learning (PBL). He sent me many PBL research papers from teaching colleagues around the world - I found strong resonance:<br style="box-sizing:border-box"><br style="box-sizing:border-box">For my motor vehicle racing licence, my peers, on the track at the same time as me, assessed me. When doing my MBA at UNSW, my fellow students assessed me in some subjects. During my research in hospitals, I saw budding clinicians assessed by their peers. While training to be a Lawn Tennis coach, once again, I was assessed by my peers.<br style="box-sizing:border-box"><br style="box-sizing:border-box">Under PBL, the 'teacher' is really a facilitator; students decide their own learning outcomes and methods, and their peers assess them - hence, the Learning and Assessment go together; PBL is a co-operative system. Research shows that students set and attain higher levels of competence than in the monolithic-classroom model. Another beauty of PBL is that students can choose their own areas of expertise - whether EME, ATV, SatComms, SDR, FT-8, JT65, Morse, RTTY, construction ... or ... camouflaged back-hand top-spin lob??<br style="box-sizing:border-box"><br style="box-sizing:border-box">By 2004 we had three models - the RSGB's, TAFE's CBT and PBL. Whether due diligence was done on any, I don't know, but the WIA bought the RSGB's system and persuaded the ACA, it was a 'good thing'. The WIA set up a Registered Training Organisation to administer this new system of Education and Assessment - allegedly along CBT lines, but with the UK notion of knowledge questions answered closed-book within a fixed time.<br style="box-sizing:border-box"><br style="box-sizing:border-box">Any modern-day teacher can tell you that the present syllabus – really just lists of teaching plan topics - is not equivalent to CBT Learning Outcomes.<br style="box-sizing:border-box"><br style="box-sizing:border-box">The present three-tier, linear model offers a single path to a hilltop that few new radio amateurs seek. Just look at the conversion rates from Foundation to Standard or Advanced. Some believe that 3 levels provide an incentive for candidates to access more bands and use more power. Did anyone ask candidates whether they saw graded levels as an incentive, or wanted the extra bands and power??<br style="box-sizing:border-box"><br style="box-sizing:border-box">The ‘theory’ in the present Foundation learning material pre-dates Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg and Planck - but who needs atomic theory anyway? Is a radio amateur going to design a BJT, a FET or an IC? And there is not a skerrick of computing or digital comms at any AOCP level.<br style="box-sizing:border-box"><br style="box-sizing:border-box">The new system has one benefit - new candidates for all levels must demonstrate practical ability to connect up a radio, and proper communication protocols. However, along with these safety-style items are open-book Regulations knowledge items that pen and paper, multi-guess could test, rather than invigilated surveillance of page turning.<br style="box-sizing:border-box"><br style="box-sizing:border-box">In summary, I believe that we need to change the Learning Outcomes and the modes of Learning and Assessment:<br style="box-sizing:border-box"><br style="box-sizing:border-box">The present antediluvian syllabus needs flexibility and relevance. Learning and Assessment must go hand in hand.<br style="box-sizing:border-box"><br style="box-sizing:border-box">73 from<span> </span><em style="box-sizing:border-box"><strong style="box-sizing:border-box">Brian, VK2GCE</strong></em><br style="box-sizing:border-box"><br style="box-sizing:border-box"><font size="2" style="box-sizing:border-box">Source WIA News<span> </span><br style="box-sizing:border-box"><a href="http://www.wia.org.au/members/broadcast/wianews/display.php?file_id=wianews-2018-03-11" target="_blank" style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(0,51,102);text-decoration:none;word-wrap:break-word">http://www.wia.org.au/members/broadcast/wianews/<br style="box-sizing:border-box">display.php?file_id=wianews-2018-03-11</a></font></p>
<br></div>